|
|
Post by fascinating on Jul 21, 2018 8:00:12 GMT 1
I can't see that they haven't been. Quite, it is simply absurd to say that you, Jean and I are incapable of being ordinarily civil. an example being the above post, which has nothing to do with the topic of this debate, it's only purpose is insulting you. |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 21, 2018 8:30:57 GMT 1
But what a brilliant example of the genre! I doubt if any of the rest of us could begin to compete with insults of this quality! ...Your blend of obsequiousness and greedy, flatulent, self-aggrandising delusion, to a tee. Or - this is a stretch, I know, but you can still do a bit of research probably - the character you most remind me of is Camus' Jean-Baptiste Clamence in The Fall. All the same empty life-denying civilisation-eroding beliefs, the self-delusion, the greed, the casual self-justified thievery and preening under the guise of "helping" people, who'd actually rather you simply stopped exploiting them, or at least were honest about it, and did something useful instead, the hypocrisies, futilities, the sheer boastful stupidity and supercilious belief that the people you exploit can't see through you, the farcical inabilities to see what's in front of your nose and arrogant self-congratulation that this blindness is a virtue!... |
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Jul 21, 2018 12:03:19 GMT 1
I can't see that they haven't been. Quite, it is simply absurd to say that you, Jean and I are incapable of being ordinarily civil. But none of you can, for long. You can't even ask for information you apparently want help in finding! It's just too much, this quite ordinary civility. You want someone else to help you, civilisation has evolved these standard conventions - you ask, politely, not demand, not order, not challenge, you ask. In response to his insult, yes, as when I'm often impelled to insult you. The difference between us is that my insult is informative, and were he or you able you might be able to learn something from it. The truth is that neither of you - or Jean for that matter - are ever able to "debate" any topic, which is why you never try. To be frank, I really don't know what any of you are doing here at all. This is a board set up to discuss matters pertaining to science. None of you know anything about any such topic, and to be fair none of you even pretend otherwise, or make any effort to engage in any such "debate". You save your involvement for peripheral socio-political topics - but it's not long at all before you can't resist insulting those you disagree with, presumably from frustration at your own lack of competence. Often, as with your last contributions in the past weeks, or Aqua's, these insults are all your posts consist of. Jean's techniques are somewhat more sophisticated - she ignores any rejoinder or question that would reveal her ignorance or the fatuity of her argument, makes boastful claims like Aqua to having "answered all this elsewhere" and other blatant lies, and, her favourite, pretends she doesn't have the patience or time to respond, when quite obviously she's simply unable to. None of this is civil either, and it's certainly nothing to do with "debate". |
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Jul 21, 2018 13:00:36 GMT 1
Stacy Herbert discusses on Keiser an interesting analysis by Moody's today of what's happened to the global economies since Trump started his "trade war". Contrary to the dire unanimous warnings from the corporate mainstream media, the American economy continues its seemingly inexorable rise - the Stock Market has calculated the US must and will inevitably win such a trade war, and continues its optimistic growth, as does employment, disposble income, industrial output, and business confidence. The Stock Markets of the Chinese, Germans, Koreans, Japanese, and Europe generally have plummetted, on the other hand - more than 6% down in China, 5% in Europe. Hence the furious backpedalling on "retaliation" and calls to get round the negotiating table from the Chinese and EU.
|
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Jul 21, 2018 16:07:29 GMT 1
But what a brilliant example of the genre! I doubt if any of the rest of us could begin to compete with insults of this quality! ...Your blend of obsequiousness and greedy, flatulent, self-aggrandising delusion, to a tee. Or - this is a stretch, I know, but you can still do a bit of research probably - the character you most remind me of is Camus' Jean-Baptiste Clamence in The Fall. All the same empty life-denying civilisation-eroding beliefs, the self-delusion, the greed, the casual self-justified thievery and preening under the guise of "helping" people, who'd actually rather you simply stopped exploiting them, or at least were honest about it, and did something useful instead, the hypocrisies, futilities, the sheer boastful stupidity and supercilious belief that the people you exploit can't see through you, the farcical inabilities to see what's in front of your nose and arrogant self-congratulation that this blindness is a virtue!... Yes, the pure egregiousness of the disproportionality is staggering. As it’s so extreme, it’s infinitely ignorable by its target. Not so with this bit you omitted: I guess the Uriah reference must have passed you by, else you wouldn't have so creepily endorsed it. He was a character in Dickens, a middle-brow potboiler writer in the Victorian era, and as "polite" as you are. Try Jane Austen's Mr.Collins instead - you may have seen the BBC adaptation? This is grossly insulting to a man who revels in most of the works of Dickens and all those of his beloved Jane. Actionable, surely. However, this is a bit weak: In truth, you're probably just a Charles Pooter. For all his petty faults, he didn’t exploit anyone – even his servants – and was pretty harmless. |
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Jul 21, 2018 17:27:18 GMT 1
mrsonde can't show where we have failed to show politeness in our requests.
This is the "non-scientific friendly chat room"
|
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Jul 21, 2018 17:37:11 GMT 1
mrsonde can't show where we have failed to show politeness in our requests. You haven't made a request. You said it was "pathetic" to point that out. Neither has Jean. You both like to issue orders, and I've told you, many many times, I'm not in your chain of command. On the R4 Science board. If you merely wish to be non-scientific and friendly (Ha!), what are you doing here? There are hundreds of other boards you could be so flaky on - you might even find someone peculiar enough to share your notion of what "friendly" means. |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 21, 2018 19:34:23 GMT 1
I’d be very interested to know if somewhere else in cyberspace there’s a messageboard where Nick engages in civil and productive discussions.
I suspect not, somehow.
|
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Jul 21, 2018 21:51:23 GMT 1
The fact remains: mrsonde can't show where we have failed to show politeness in our requests.
None of that pointless drivel alters the fact that, as I said, this is the non-scientific friendly chat room.
|
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Jul 21, 2018 23:10:08 GMT 1
I do check the supposedly scientific sub-boards from time to time, but they're hardly used. So, if we don't use this sub-board, then MR may as well close the whole thing down, if she wants to be punitively purist.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Jul 27, 2018 17:41:08 GMT 1
But what a brilliant example of the genre! I doubt if any of the rest of us could begin to compete with insults of this quality! I very much doubt so too! Take note: Don't bring a knife to a gun fight. Not extreme - unlike your puny efforts, it's just accurate. And of course you'll ignore it. Sigh. Apologies - nothing at all like Uriah Heep and Mr.Collins! Mr.Vholes then, is it? You've forgotten where he worked, I presume, and no, "servants" weren't exploited at all - you were just "helping" them, weren't you? Yes, he was pretty harmless. The banality of the petit bourgeois exploiter, certainly. As I said, that was the intention. |
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Jul 27, 2018 19:06:47 GMT 1
Very little point in perpetuating this, as you start off by attributing jean's words to me, and then make several other formatting and substantive misjudgments.
If, however, you could let me know why you think Pooter's place of work has any relevance to your animus against me, I'd be grateful.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jul 27, 2018 19:17:57 GMT 1
...Take note: Don't bring a knife to a gun fight... ...your puny efforts... You never were much good at spotting irony, were you, Nick? Actually, to make things as clear as possible, I think I can speak for most of the few other posters on this board when I say we are not in competition with you in this matter, because we are not interested in insulting anyone in any way at all. We are therefore very happy to concede victory to you as unchallenged champion insulter. |
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Aug 9, 2018 23:24:24 GMT 1
...Take note: Don't bring a knife to a gun fight... ...your puny efforts... Actually, to make things as clear as possible, I think I can speak for most of the few other posters on this board when I say we are not in competition with you in this matter, because we are not interested in insulting anyone in any way at all.  Is this your interpretation of "irony" again? Fine. I wasn't really looking for such a worthless acknowledgement, of course - as usual, you've entirely missed the point. I'm not in competition with anyone, over anything. My point is simply one I've made many times, to you and Fing at least, because you're the ones usually so hypocritically whining about it. If you don't want to be insulted, don't start the insults. It's a simple lesson. Hopefully Aqua is a bit brighter than either of you, and it won't have to be repeated. |
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Aug 11, 2018 0:17:26 GMT 1
Actually, to make things as clear as possible, I think I can speak for most of the few other posters on this board when I say we are not in competition with you in this matter, because we are not interested in insulting anyone in any way at all. Is this your interpretation of "irony" again? Fine. I wasn't really looking for such a worthless acknowledgement, of course - as usual, you've entirely missed the point. I'm not in competition with anyone, over anything. My point is simply one I've made many times, to you and Fing at least, because you're the ones usually so hypocritically whining about it. If you don't want to be insulted, don't start the insults. It's a simple lesson. Hopefully Aqua is a bit brighter than either of you, and it won't have to be repeated. mrsonde, just go over your own posts and see how many times you insult others first. It's a simple lesson. (Answer: almost every time.) |
|
